Downing Street faced fresh questions over what it knew and when after the Daily Mail reported that officials were told days before Lord Mandelson’s removal that the peer had exchanged messages with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and suggested Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful.
The paper reported that No 10 was alerted on Tuesday to a 2,000-word Bloomberg memo seeking comment that, it said, contained the alleged correspondence. Prime Minister Keir Starmer told MPs during Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday that he had “confidence” in the then-ambassador in Washington, according to the Daily Mail, and the Foreign Office later sought a response from Lord Mandelson on Wednesday afternoon. On Thursday morning the Foreign Office announced that “the suggestion that Jeffrey Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful and should be challenged is new information” and that, “in light of that... he has been withdrawn as ambassador with immediate effect.”
The Daily Mail’s account prompted renewed scrutiny of internal communications at No 10. The paper said sources insisted the prime minister had not been told of the alleged contents of the correspondence before his Commons remarks, while other reports and opposition figures pressed for clarification about who in Downing Street had been briefed and whether the prime minister was kept informed.
Downing Street did not identify which official or office had received the information first. The report named Morgan McSweeney, the prime minister’s chief of staff, as a focus of questions from MPs and commentators about who in Downing Street knew the details and when. Downing Street denied there had been a row between the prime minister and his chief adviser over the issue, according to the Daily Mail.
The revelations led to criticism from opposition and some Conservative figures. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch urged the prime minister to appear in Parliament and answer “serious questions” about what he knew and when. Within Labour there were reports of mounting disquiet among MPs over the handling of the episode, with some warning Sir Keir’s position could be weakened ahead of the next general election.
Business Secretary Peter Kyle, a Labour ally of Lord Mandelson’s, said security checks before the appointment had only “turned up information that was already public,” and that the newly published emails had changed the situation. Other Labour MPs voiced concern about the political damage. Graham Stringer said the prime minister was “vulnerable,” while Rosena Allin-Khan warned public opinion in forthcoming polls would be a barometer of confidence in his leadership, according to comments reported by the Daily Mail.
The Foreign Office and its permanent secretary, Sir Oliver Robbins, were reported to have sought a response from Lord Mandelson on the emails before the decision to withdraw him from the ambassadorial post. The Daily Mail said the Bloomberg memo had been seeking comment from Lord Mandelson and that his response only arrived on Wednesday afternoon.
Lord Mandelson, a senior Labour figure and former cabinet minister, was removed from the ambassadorial role after publication of the alleged correspondence. The exchanges, as described in reporting, contained messages of support to Epstein while he faced legal proceedings. The Foreign Office’s statement said the suggestion that Epstein’s first conviction was wrongful was “new information” and prompted the decision to withdraw the appointment.
The episode has intensified scrutiny of vetting and appointment processes for diplomatic roles and of internal government communications. It also increased pressure on the prime minister’s office as Labour prepares for the next election. Downing Street said the prime minister would address the matter in Parliament; media reports said he was expected to speak on Monday. Detailed timelines and internal briefings remain the subject of inquiry by journalists and parliamentarians.
All claims in this report are based on coverage in the Daily Mail and statements from the Foreign Office and named individuals reported in that coverage. Downing Street, the Foreign Office and representatives for Lord Mandelson did not provide further comment beyond the statements cited in those reports at the time of publication.